G.R. No. 189466 and 189506, February 11, 2010
DARYL GRACE J. ABAYON, Petitioner, vs. THE HONORABLE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL, PERFECTO C. LUCABAN, JR., RONYL S. DE LA CRUZ and AGUSTIN C. DOROGA, Respondents.

CONGRESSMAN JOVITO S. PALPARAN, JR., Petitioner, vs. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES ELECTORAL TRIBUNAL (HRET), DR. REYNALDO LESACA, JR., CRISTINA PALABAY, RENATO M. REYES, JR., ERLINDA CADAPAN, ANTONIO FLORES and JOSELITO USTAREZ, Respondents.

FACTS

In G.R. No. 189466, petitioner Daryl Grace J. Abayon is the first nominee of the Aangat Tayo party-list organization that won a seat in the House of Representatives during the 2007 elections. Respondents filed a petition for quo warranto with the HRET against Aangat Tayo and Abayon, claiming the party-list was not eligible and that Abayon was not qualified as she did not belong to the marginalized sectors, being the wife of an incumbent district representative and having lost her bid as a party-list nominee in the 2004 elections. Abayon countered that the COMELEC had confirmed Aangat Tayo’s status and her membership in the women sector, and argued that the HRET had no jurisdiction as the challenge was a collateral attack on the party’s registration and her eligibility was an internal concern of the party-list.
In G.R. No. 189506, petitioner Jovito S. Palparan, Jr. is the first nominee of the Bantay party-list group that won a seat in the 2007 elections. Respondents filed a petition for quo warranto with the HRET against Bantay and Palparan, alleging Palparan was ineligible as he did not belong to the marginalized sectors Bantay represented and had committed human rights violations. Palparan countered that the HRET had no jurisdiction over him as it was the party-list, not he, that was elected, and any question on his eligibility was an internal concern of Bantay.
In both cases, the HRET issued orders dismissing the petitions against the party-list organizations (Aangat Tayo and Bantay) for lack of jurisdiction, as the issue of party-list eligibility falls under the COMELEC. However, the HRET upheld its jurisdiction over the qualifications of the individual nominees, Abayon and Palparan. Their motions for reconsideration were denied, prompting these petitions for certiorari.

ISSUE

Whether or not respondent HRET has jurisdiction over the question of qualifications of petitioners Abayon and Palparan as nominees of Aangat Tayo and Bantay party-list organizations, respectively, who took the seats at the House of Representatives that such organizations won in the 2007 elections.

RULING

Yes, the HRET has jurisdiction. The Supreme Court ruled that party-list nominees are considered “elected members” of the House of Representatives. Section 5, Article VI of the Constitution identifies the members of the House as those elected from legislative districts and “those who… shall be elected through a party-list system.” Although voters cast their votes for the party-list organization, it is the nominee who sits as a member of the House. Once elected, party-list representatives have the same rights and obligations as district representatives. The Party-List System Act (R.A. 7941) also recognizes party-list nominees as “members of the House of Representatives.” Furthermore, both the Constitution and R.A. 7941 set the qualifications and grounds for disqualification of party-list nominees, including the requirement that a nominee must be a “bona fide member of the party or organization which he seeks to represent.” Under Section 17, Article VI of the Constitution, the HRET is the sole judge of all contests relating to the election, returns, and qualifications of the Members of the House of Representatives. Therefore, the HRET has jurisdiction to adjudicate the qualifications of party-list nominees who assume seats in the House. The petitions were dismissed and the challenged HRET orders and resolutions were affirmed.